NASA chief: Visiting an asteroid is all agency can afford

April 24, 2013
by Mark K. Matthews

A NASA plan to send astronauts to an asteroid was met with skepticism Wednesday when NASA Chief Charlie Bolden presented the idea to top space officials in Congress - though their doubts may not be enough to sink the program.

The asteroid mission, unveiled a few weeks ago, would send a NASA probe to capture a small asteroid and drag it to a point near the moon so astronauts riding a new rocket and capsule could visit it, possibly as soon as 2021.

"The goal is (to) remain the world's leader in exploration," Bolden said. But members of the U.S. House science committee took issue with the project's cost and feasibility - and questioned why the agency wasn't planning a return to the moon en route to an eventual mission to Mars.

As part of its 2014 budget proposal, the White House wants NASA to spend $105 million next year to begin planning the asteroid mission, which could cost upward of $2.6 billion.

Broadly, the administration envisions sending a probe as soon as 2017 to capture a 25-foot, 500-ton asteroid and tug it near the moon - possibly to a spot about 277,000 miles from Earth that would use competing gravitational forces to allow it to "sit" there.

Astronauts flying NASA's new Orion capsule and Space Launch System rocket then would visit it to take samples and possibly set foot on its surface.

In addition to scientific benefits, Bolden said an asteroid trip would serve as a steppingstone for an eventual Mars mission while also teaching NASA engineers how to divert an asteroid in case one ever threatened Earth. He called it "an unprecedented technological challenge."

Lawmakers, however, wanted to know whether NASA would learn more - and do more - by going back to the moon instead.

"Would (a moon mission) be a better precursor to a Mars mission?" asked U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, who chairs the science committee.

Bolden replied that "both are good" but that an asteroid mission was the only program affordable under his proposed 2014 budget of $17.7 billion.

"Going to the moon is a factor of three (times) more expensive," Bolden said.

NASA is spending about $3 billion annually to develop the Orion capsule and SLS rocket, and construction of moon landers and other lunar equipment would add billions of dollars to that.

Not every member of the committee, however, was critical. U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., said an asteroid mission was a "good direction to go."

And as yet, there's no major opposition in the U.S. Senate, which could help clear the way for the idea to become reality.

At a hearing Tuesday, Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., reiterated support for the White House proposal, and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas - a fiery freshman who rarely misses a chance to criticize the administration - held his fire.

The lack of resistance is tied to Senate support of the Space Launch System. Senators from key NASA states - Florida, Texas and Alabama - pushed President Barack Obama to build it, and the asteroid mission is seen as a way to give purpose to the rocket, once criticized as a "rocket to nowhere."

Illustrative of that point was the initial reaction of Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala.

"NASA should continue to explore the universe and challenge scientific and technical boundaries," he said in a statement. "However, NASA should maintain focus on its core mission and continue development of the Space Launch System so that it will be ready for any future NASA mission."

(Phys.org)—Researchers at the Keck Institute for Space Studies have released a paper outlining a proposal to send an unmanned spacecraft into deep space to capture an asteroid and return it as a Near Earth Asteroid (NEA) ...

(AP) -- President Barack Obama is redirecting America's space program, killing NASA's $100 billion plans to return astronauts to the moon and using much of that money for new rocket technology research.

(AP) -- NASA may not be going to the moon anytime soon and its space shuttles are about to be retired, but it could conceivably increase the number of agency jobs under a new reorganization, NASA's chief said Thursday.

(AP) -- President Barack Obama is essentially grounding efforts to return astronauts to the moon and instead is sending NASA in new directions with roughly $6 billion more, according to officials familiar with the plans.

(Phys.org)—A small team of researchers from the U.S. and Italy has found evidence of a naturally formed quasicrystal in a sample obtained from the Khatyrka meteorite. In their paper published in the journal Scientific Reports, ...

As a cosmic dust magnet, Saturn's C ring gives away its youth. Once thought formed in an older, primordial era, the ring may be but a mere babe – less than 100 million years old, according to Cornell-led astronomers in ...

Scientists on board NASA's flying telescope, the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy, or SOFIA, caught sight of roiling material streaming from a newly formed star, which could spark the birth of a new generation ...

Astronomers have used NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and other telescopes to show that a recently-discovered galaxy is undergoing an extraordinary boom of stellar construction. The galaxy is 12.7 billion light years from ...

A professional astrophysicist and an amateur astronomer have teamed up to reveal surprising details about an unusual millisecond pulsar (MSP) binary system comprising one of the fastest-spinning pulsars in our Galaxy and ...

This isn't really the place to discuss modern politics, but as for science history:

If you look back at the origins of what we call science today, the middle east was certainly the birthplace. Egypt, Mesopotamia, Pythagoreans, Greeks, etc. were all closely related by geography and traded ideas by way of sea trade.

Set "foot" on a 25 foot asteroid? Huh? It's really sad that we can spend billions a year on spectator sports but we can't seem to put a coherent plan together to get back to the moon or travel to Mars. When was the last time we really had astronauts? Oh yeah ... that was back in the 60's and early 70's. With respect to manned space exploration, what have we done? Oh yeah ... exactly nothing. And now we want to set foot on a boulder. Wow.

Agreed. This seems like a complete waste of limited resources. We don't need to haul an asteroid into moon orbit to test Orion or SLS, and unless they bring back living bacteria I have serious doubts about the gainful merits of a sample return mission from an asteroid. This nonsense about learning how to manipulate future asteroid threats by using a method that is only effective on asteroids that aren't a threat to our population kind of irks me too.

I also don't like the idea of another ISS-like facility on the far side of the moon. Why do that rather than land some stuff ON the moon? Because it takes a little more fuel to get back? Well hell, maybe we should see if we can make it in situ at an intelligent landing site. Or maybe we could step up the timeline to the full cargo variant of the SLS for a worthy mission. Or just save for a rainy day. I don't like any of the new "big" ideas getting play right now.

Please sign in to add a comment.
Registration is free, and takes less than a minute.
Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.